To follow up on the comment from December 16th regarding the primo scale, it also comes in several colors to coordinate with your kitchen decor. That's important to girls like me I found the Primo scale at AZScales.com and Escali.com

My gripe is that the reading creeps even after taring. It would creep for a few minutes. Very frustrating. I would not recommend it even though it's cheaper than the more established brands.

The only time my scales creep are when they aren't on a smooth countertop. I find that tile doesn't work as well as a wood table, laminate/formica counter, or granite/stone counter. On those surfaces, the scale is evenly positioned on its sensors. If your scale creeps and you aren't on an uneven surface, I think you may have a defective scale.

I have an Oxo recommended by America's Test Kitchen and just love it! I use it for baking -- imperative -- and all sorts of other things: Dividing large quantities of meat/poultry for the freezer, measuring dough so loaves and buns are equal weight (although I've found I can divide things pretty equally by "eyeballing" it), etc. I just can't believe I've gone this long without an accurate scale. However, when I starting cooking, there were no digital scales (at least that I could afford in a home kitchen).
Great site!

I take your point concerning the cheaper scales. However, for those with restricted incomes and health problems like diabetes or obesity, these are still useful, even if inaccurate. Why? Many of the food guides for nutrition give serving sizes in grams, not dry measuring cups. If you are told a serving size is 80g for so many calories, fat, fiber, etc., even an inaccurate scale is better than scratching your head and trying to guess at the serving size in cups, half cups, 1/3 cups, etc. Just something to think about.

Sorry, a bit long post!
I purchased the i5000 scale from Old Will Knots in hopes it would meet my needs for bread baking (measuring 3kg-4kg total and the ability to measure 5-20g items like salt as it's being poured). Here's what I found.

First, I set up the scale and did some tests with 1g weights. I put 10 1g weights on the scale and it displayed 10g. Same with 20, 30, 100, 500 - excellent.

Next I took 10 1g weights and dropped them onto the zeroed scale one after another as though I was pouring an ingredient like salt. To my amazement and disappointment after adding the first the scale still showed zero, after the second - zero, third - zero and on and on. It was zeroing out the weights as I added them so that even after 10g was on the scale it was still reading zero. Oddly enough, once I removed the weights the scale displayed -10g (negative 10g) as though I had added the weights tared the scale then removed the weights. The scale exhibited this behavior whether it was just the 10 1g weights or I added 1g increments to an already poured larger weight. Pretty disappointing!

Has anyone else experienced this behavior? Can anyone try it on their i5000 and let me know if theirs does the same thing?

The My Weigh website has a FAQ which talks about a behavior their scales have called "dribbling" where if you add weight to the scale in increments of less than 50% of the smallest supported increment (in this case less than 0.5g) the scale will zero out the added weight assuming it's environmental error. It will continue to zero out the weight as you pour if you pour slowly enough. The real problem for me is it's happening when pouring at this scale's supported increment of 1g not below 0.5g so it makes slowly adding things like salt impossible to do accurately without sometimes losing the weight. I've had this happen in real baking situations. Anyone have any thoughts or suggestions for me? Or maybe a recommendation of a better scale for pouring?

Next I took 10 1g weights and dropped them onto the zeroed scale one after another as though I was pouring an ingredient like salt. To my amazement and disappointment after adding the first the scale still showed zero, after the second - zero, third - zero and on and on. It was zeroing out the weights as I added them so that even after 10g was on the scale it was still reading zero. Oddly enough, once I removed the weights the scale displayed -10g (negative 10g) as though I had added the weights tared the scale then removed the weights. The scale exhibited this behavior whether it was just the 10 1g weights or I added 1g increments to an already poured larger weight. Pretty disappointing!

Has anyone else experienced this behavior? Can anyone try it on their i5000 and let me know if theirs does the same thing?

Yes, this behavior is repeatable on the i5000 and other scales with 1g minimum precision. MyWeigh now makes a newer scale that is about the same size as the i5000 with similar specifications except it has a 0.1 g precision which would fulfill all your needs: the MyWeigh iBalance 5500. Unfortunately, it comes at a heft price of over $150, but that's the cost of precision over such a large range (0.1 g precision from 0-5kg). What I do instead is use a small scale to measure tiny portions of things. I currently use a MyWeigh GlasScale 100 that has 0.01 g precision but a max load of only 100 g. It's small and portable and I use it for measuring salt, pepper, and spices. Any of their 0.1 g or finer precision instruments should serve your purpose.

As a naval architect and shipbuilder I am keen on relaibility and durability; and can fully understand why most American kitchens use volume rather than mass. We learn to design things for their proper function, for durability, safety, ease of maintenance, and incidentally, for their cosmetic appeal. It seems to me that - no offence meant to my electrical colleagues, - many cheap digital instuments are little more than junk. Far too much bling.

The reason I make this comment is because today, while baking bread, my digital kitchen scales began giving irreglar readings. I checked the 9V battery and it is fine, and since the instrument was stood firmly on the table top, the fluctuations can only be due to the circuitry or the load cell. I nearly blew a fuse, but soon calmed down again, calling a halt to the baking while I converted the mass of the ingredients into volumes. I am happy to say that the wholemeal baps were a success in the end.

I was always against buying such cheap domestic equipment as this, but because my wife always wanted it I couldn't really protest too much. But now the baking of bread has landed on my plate so to speak, it is volumes all the way.

Full cream milk and skimmed milk has for practical purposes the same density, 1030 kg/m3 at room temperature. SIFTED wheat flour has a density of about 530 kg/m3.

You say in your article that "Technically, a balance determines mass not weight and is the only type of scale that will work properly if you plan to cook on the moon."

Since all of the measurements are relative and you are really using them to get the proper ratios of ingredients, wouldn't any of these options "technically" work on the moon? (or for that matter at various elevations and atmospheric pressures?)